Appoint Ken Esplin to Iron County Commission
After the article came out on Saturday announcing the applicants for the Iron County Commission appointment, I became hopeful, especially upon seeing Ken Esplin’s name on the list.
The Iron County Republican Party will be narrowing the field from 14 candidates to three names on Thursday to be put before the Iron County Commission. The Commission will then vote on who should fill the seat of Commissioner Dennis Stowell, who was recently elected as a Utah State Senator. The Commission should select Esplin.
First, as the representatives from the county’s 32 precincts and 14 county officials meet, I’d like to advocate they seriously consider the long-time resident of Iron County. Esplin is a man of great integrity and experience, serving currently on the Iron County Planning Commission.
He doesn’t have an agenda or own county property that could cause a conflict of interest with decisions in regards to development. His mind is sharp and he can cite any ordinance from memory.
Esplin is also a community activist who has staved off unwanted development of apartments, homeless shelters and other undesirable elements in his neighborhood around the old hospital. He knows how to organize and get goals accomplished.
He is also a loving husband, good father and grandfather and a man true to his word. He drives a school bus for the Iron County School District in his retirement, which leaves him enough time to dedicate full-time hours to the Commission.
The Commission needs the level head of Esplin. He is not rash in his decision making and he really considers people’s best interests. I believe Esplin is a real statesman and steward of the community who puts action behind his words. He not only talks the talk — he walks the walk.
Appoint Ken Esplin to the Iron County Commission. He’s no "good old boy" and will represent the diversity that now is ever-growing and ever-present in Iron County
RSS feed
Comments
Ken's a good guy, but I would prefer Rick Bonzo. He's done a good job on the Enoch City Council and has all the qualifications you list for Ken. Which makes them equally desirable, actually.
There are a lot of good candidates on the list, actually. Also several I think should be rejected out of hand.
Posted by: Arlene Ball | December 13, 2006 08:31 AM
Rick Bonzo would also make a fantastic commissioner. I thought he was a stalwart mayor of Enoch and I think he'd do a good job. But I still champion Esplin because he already knows the county governance well, the zoning ordinances and the habitat conservation plan. I just think it makes sense for a person who has served on the planning commission to move into a commissioner slot because that person would already be well versed on the issues facing the county. I agree with you, too. There are a couple of names on that list who should be immediately dismissed because of strong conflict of interests with development opportunities. I don't think any one who can stand to financially profit should be given decision-making power on such development.
Posted by: Jennifer Weaver | December 13, 2006 01:44 PM
Why do advocates for downwinders, like Richard Miller, always quote the Johnson 1984 study instead of the far more scientifically valid study by Machado et al. in 1987? Last night on TLC Miller again quoted from the Johnson study.
Dr. Joseph Lyon also published an article in JAMA critical of the Johnson study. According to Lyon, Johnson's statistics were very misleading. Johnson, like Jackovich who's article in People magazine claimed 91 cancer victims in cast and crew of The Conqueror, had relied on recall with heads of families instead of on medical records to account for cancer cases over the preceding thirty years---residents could mistake diseases for cancer and thus alter the statistics.
Lyon questioned the accuracy of memory-recalled cancer--studies have shown that memories are a poor substituted for medical records. Even more troubling, said Lyon, was that volumteeers conducted interviews after the families had viewed a documentary titled "Paul Jacobs and the Nuclear Gang," which stressed that fallout caused cancer in people living downwind from the Nevada Test Site. According to Lyon, interviewees who had seen the film may have incorrectly reported incidences of cancer and consequently skewed the statistics.
At any rate the Machado study, which is widely referenced in scientific literature whereas the Johnson study is not, completely discredited the Johnson study.
Posted by: Daniel w. Miles | February 17, 2007 09:32 AM